[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-September-17, 15:14, said:

You didn't, and I didn't say or imply that you did. I asked the question because I know that your second sentence is true, but I really don't understand why. There are other valid reasons to pursue an appeal - it is for example the only way for a player to get a correct ruling if the TD screwed up.

I think that Gordon used sloppy language and by "appeal" meant request for a ruling.

Although an appeal can be made by telephone to a referee; that is how my local once-a-week club decided to handle appeals. It is a very practical solution for a club that has its premises for a limited time and where people need to be sure of catching the last tube or train.

[axman]

Zelandakh, on 2015-September-14, 09:18, said:

Would this not be against the Laws? The TD needs to rectify an error or irregularity regardless of the manner (s)he becomes aware of it until the end of the correction period. It seems to me that this reads that a player can ask for a ruling but they are in a similar position to having not called the TD at the appropriate time in F2F play and that in turn might mean that they have waived their right to a favourable ruling - but the TD still needs to investigate!

It is probably worthwhile to note that via the passage of time it is possible that a contemporaneous ruling may well be controlled by different law/regulation/facts than a ruling that is not contemporaneous. For instance, facts established at the time may be more believable than those at a later and more contentious moment.

[Zelandakh]

I think a contemporaneous ruling would be extremely difficult to arrange. Generally the infraction needs to take place before the ruling!

For what you actually mean, it has already been pointed out that it is not at all uncommon to delay obtaining a ruling to the end of the match. In some cases it might be that specific facts are more difficult to obtain later than had the TD been at the table. In that case the TD just needs to do the best they can, they cannot simply ignore the infraction for convenience. As I wrote in the quoted message, the similar is similar to a F2F situation where the TD has not been called at the appropriate time.

[helene_t]

Is it obvious whether "after scoring" means "after scoring the match" or "after scoring the sesion"?

[gordontd]

helene_t, on 2015-September-23, 02:19, said:

Is it obvious whether "after scoring" means "after scoring the match" or "after scoring the sesion"?

I think it's clear that it means after scoring that set, because the full sentence is "Confirm your wish to have a ruling before your opponents have left the table to score up that set of boards; if after scoring you withdraw your request that would be an end of the matter."